The city adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW and the SEPA rules, Chapter 197 WAC. This chapter contains the city’s SEPA procedures and policies. The SEPA rules contained in Chapter 197-11 WAC must be used in conjunction with this chapter.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
Unless otherwise specifically stated herein, all statutes, ordinances and regulations codes which are adopted or referenced in this chapter shall be as now exist or are hereafter amended.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or as hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:
WAC 197-11-700
Definitions.
WAC 197-11-702
Act.
WAC 197-11-704
Action.
WAC 197-11-706
Addendum.
WAC 197-11-708
Adoption.
WAC 197-11-710
Affected Tribe.
WAC 197-11-712
Affecting.
WAC 197-11-714
Agency.
WAC 197-11-716
Applicant.
WAC 197-11-714
Built Environment.
WAC 197-11-720
Categorical Exemption.
WAC 197-11-721
Closed Record Appeal
WAC 197-11-722
Consolidated Appeal.
WAC 197-11-724
Consulted Agency.
WAC 197-11-726
Cost-Benefit Analysis.
WAC 197-11-728
County/City.
WAC 197-11-730
Decision Maker.
WAC 197-11-732
Department.
WAC 197-11-734
Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS).
WAC 197-11-736
Determination of Significance (DS).
WAC 197-11-738
EIS.
WAC 197-11-740
Environment.
WAC 197-11-742
Environmental Checklist.
WAC 197-11-744
Environmental Document.
WAC 197-11-746
Environmental Review.
WAC 197-11-750
Expanded Scoping.
WAC 197-11-752
Impacts.
WAC 197-11-754
Incorporation by Reference.
WAC 197-11-756
Lands Covered by Water.
WAC 197-11-758
Lead Agency.
WAC 197-11-760
License.
WAC 197-11-762
Local Agency.
WAC 197-11-764
Major Action.
WAC 197-11-766
Mitigated DNS.
WAC 197-11-768
Mitigation.
WAC 197-11-770
Natural Environment.
WAC 197-11-772
NEPA.
WAC 197-11-774
Nonproject.
WAC 197-11-775
Open Record Hearing.
WAC 197-11-776
Phased Review.
WAC 197-11-778
Preparation.
WAC 197-11-780
Private Project.
WAC 197-11-782
Probable.
WAC 197-11-784
Proposal.
WAC 197-11-786
Reasonable Alternative.
WAC 197-11-788
Responsible Official.
WAC 197-11-790
SEPA.
WAC 197-11-792
Scope.
WAC 197-11-793
Scoping.
WAC 197-11-794
Significant.
WAC 197-11-796
State Agency.
WAC 197-11-797
Threshold Determination.
WAC 197-11-799
Underlying Governmental Action.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
In addition to those definitions contained within WAC 197-11-700 through 197-11-799, when used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the content indicates otherwise:
“City”
means the city of Pomeroy, Washington.
“Department”
means any division, subdivision, or organizational unit of the city established by ordinance, rule, or order.
“Early notice”
means the city’s response to an applicant stating whether it considers issuance of the determination of significance likely for the applicant’s proposal.
“SEPA rules”
means Chapter 197-11 WAC adopted by the Department of Ecology.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference:
WAC 197-11-040
Definitions.
WAC 197-11-050
Lead Agency.
WAC 197-11-055
Timing of the SEPA Process.
WAC 197-11-060
Content of Environmental Review.
WAC 197-11-070
Limitations on Actions during SEPA Process.
WAC 197-11-080
Incomplete or Unavailable Information.
WAC 197-11-090
Supporting Documents.
WAC 197-11-100
Information Required of Applicants.
WAC 197-11-158
GMA Project Review-Reliance on Existing Plans, Laws and Regulations.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
For all proposals, projects and applications involving SEPA review, the responsible official shall be the director of public works or such other person as the mayor may designate in writing.
For all proposals for which the city is lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required environmental documents, including an EIS, and perform any other functions assigned to the lead agency or responsible official by those sections of the SEPA rules that have been adopted by reference.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The responsible official shall determine whether the city will be the lead agency for all projects, applications, and proposals involving SEPA review.
When the city is not the lead agency, all departments of the city shall use and consider, as appropriate, the DNS or the final EIS of the lead agency in making decisions on the proposal. No city department shall prepare or require preparation of a DNS or EIS in addition to that prepared by the lead agency unless the city determines a supplemental environmental review is necessary under WAC 197-11-600.
If the responsible official receives a lead agency determination made by another agency that appears inconsistent with the criteria of WAC 197-11-253 or WAC 197-11-922 through WAC 197-11-940, he or she may object to the determination with the agency which made the determination. If the objection is not resolved within fourteen days of receipt of the determination, the responsible official shall petition the Department of Ecology for a lead agency determination under WAC 197-11-946.
The responsible official is authorized to make agreements, under WAC 197-11-942 and 944, as to lead agency status or shared lead agency status for any proposal or project.
If a project or proposal includes exempt and nonexempt actions, the responsible official shall make a lead agency determination, even if the application that triggers the consideration is exempt.
When the city is lead agency for a MTCA remedial action, the Department of Ecology shall be provided an opportunity under WAC 197-11-253(5) to review the environmental documents prior to public notice being provided. If the SEPA and MTCA documents are issued together with one public comment period under WAC 197-11-253(6), the city shall decide jointly with the Department of Ecology which agency receives the comment letters and how copies of the comment letters will be distributed to the other agency.
For any proposal for a private project where the city would be the lead agency and for which one or more state agencies have jurisdiction, the city’s responsible official may elect to transfer the lead agency duties to a state agency. A state agency with jurisdiction appearing first on the priority list in WAC 197-11-936 shall be the lead agency and the city shall be an agency with jurisdiction. To transfer lead agency duties, the city’s responsible official must transmit a notice of the transfer together with any relevant information available on the proposal to the appropriate state agency with jurisdiction. The responsible official of the city shall also give notice of the transfer to the private applicant and any other agencies with jurisdiction over the proposal.
The responsible official shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify other agencies with jurisdiction.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
Under state law, the procedure for review of project permits shall be combined with the environmental review process, both procedural and substantive. The process under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and this chapter shall integrate the following procedures, insofar as possible, with any applicable process for decision-making on permit and land use applications:
Staff review of the application under city codes and regulations, and the environmental review and determination thereon.
The staff report on the application, and the report or documentation concerning environmental review.
Hearings and other public processes, including required public notices, required by city codes or regulations, and hearings and other public processes, including public notices, required or conducted under SEPA.
Such other review processes as the planning director shall determine.
The responsible official shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify other agencies with jurisdiction.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts by reference the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC relating to integration of SEPA with Growth Management Act processes, analysis, and documents. These sections are adopted as now exist, or as hereafter amended, and as supplemented in this chapter.
WAC 197-11-210
SEPA/GMA Integration
WAC 197-11-220
SEPA/GMA Definitions
WAC 197-11-228
Overall SEPA/GMA Integration Procedures
WAC 197-11-230
Timing of an Integrated GMA/SEPA Process
WAC 197-11-232
SEPA/GMA Integration Procedures for Preliminary Planning, Environmental Analysis, and Expanded Scoping
WAC 197-11-235
Documents
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts by reference the following Sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC relating to integration of SEPA with the Model Toxics Control Act (MCTA). These sections are adopted as now exist, or as hereafter amended, and as supplemented in this chapter.
WAC 197-11-250
SEPA/Model Toxics Control Act Integration
WAC 197-11-253
SEPA Lead Agency for MTCA Actions
WAC 197-11-256
Preliminary Evaluation
WAC 197-11-259
Determination of Nonsignificance for MTCA Remedial Action
WAC 197-11-262
Determination of Significance and EIS for MTCA Remedial Action
WAC 197-11-265
Early Scoping for MTCA Remedial Actions
WAC 197-11-268
MTCA Interim Actions
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or as hereafter amended, by reference, and as supplemented in this chapter:
WAC 197-11-300
Purpose of this Part.
WAC 197-11-305
Categorical Exemptions.
WAC 197-11-310
Threshold Determination Required.
WAC 197-11-315
Environmental Checklist.
WAC 197-11-330
Threshold Determination Process.
WAC 197-11-335
Additional Information.
WAC 197-11-340
Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS).
WAC 197-11-350
Mitigated DNS.
WAC 197-11-355
Optional DNS Process.
WAC 197-11-360
Determination of Significance (DS)/Initiation of Scoping.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
Threshold Determinations: Except in unusual circumstances or if the optional DNS process is used as set forth in subsection (B) of this section and PMC 16.14.160, the responsible official will make a threshold determination at the time the staff report is issued for a project. A threshold determination must be issued a minimum of fifteen days prior to any open record public hearing or required by RCW 36.70B.110(6)(b).
B. 
Optional DNS Process: Except in unusual circumstances and assuming no additional comment period is determined to be necessary, if the responsible official elects to follow the optional DNS process, as set forth in PMC 16.14.160 and pursuant to WAC 197-11-355, the DNS or mitigated DNS will typically be issued within seven calendar days of the close of the comment period on the notice of application.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
Complete Application: A complete application for a threshold determination consists of the information required by PMC 16.06.220 and the following:
1. 
A narrative description of the proposed action.
2. 
Site information, including site plans, drawings, vicinity maps, other information required for a land use certification or other development/land use permit application.
3. 
A completed environmental checklist.
B. 
Additional Information/Environmental Checklist (WAC 197-11-335). If after review of the environmental checklist, it is determined that there is insufficient information to make a threshold determination, the responsible official may require one or more of the following actions:
1. 
The applicant will provide more information on subjects in the checklist.
2. 
The city may do its own further study and investigations.
3. 
The city will consult with other agencies, requesting information on the proposal’s potential impacts which lie within other agencies jurisdiction or expertise.
4. 
The city may decide that all or part of the proposal or its impacts are not sufficiently definite to allow environmental analysis and commit to timely subsequent environmental analysis, consistent with WAC 197-11-055 through 197-11-070.
C. 
Complete Application Certification: The responsible official shall certify when an application is complete as set forth in PMC 16.06.230.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city establishes the following exempt levels for minor new construction based on local conditions:
A. 
For residential dwelling units in WAC 197-11-800 1(b)(i): Up to four dwelling units.
B. 
For agricultural structures in WAC 197-11-800 1(b)(ii): Up to ten thousand square feet.
C. 
For office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings in WAC 197-11-800 1(b)(iii): Up to four thousand square feet and up to twenty parking spaces.
D. 
For parking lots in WAC 197-11-800 1(b)(iv): Up to twenty parking spaces.
E. 
For landfills and excavations in WAC 197-11-800 1(b)(v): Up to one hundred cubic yards.
Whenever the city establishes new exempt levels under this section, the responsible official shall send copies of all adopted flexible thresholds to the Department of Ecology, Headquarters Office, Olympia, Washington, 98504.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
When the city receives an application for a project or proposal or, in the case of city proposals, a department initiates a project or proposal, the responsible official shall determine whether the project or the proposal is exempt. The determination that a project or proposal is exempt shall be final and not subject to administrative review. If a proposal is exempt, none of the procedural requirements of this chapter shall apply to the proposal. The city shall not require completion of an environmental checklist for an exempt proposal.
B. 
In determining whether a project or proposal is exempt, the responsible official shall make certain the proposal is properly defined and shall identify the specific permits and approvals required.
C. 
If a proposal includes both exempt and non-exempt actions, the city may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with the procedural requirements of this chapter, except that:
1. 
The city shall not give authorization for:
a. 
Any nonexempt action.
b. 
Any action that would have an adverse environmental impact.
c. 
Any action that would limit the choice of reasonable alternatives.
2. 
The city may withhold approval of an exempt action that would lead to modification of the physical environment, when such modification would serve no purpose if the nonexempt actions were not approved.
3. 
The city may withhold approval of exempt actions that would lead to substantial financial expenditures by a private applicant when the expenditures would serve no purpose if the nonexempt actions were not approved.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
Filing Environmental Checklist: Except as provided in subsection (B) and (G) of this section, a completed environmental checklist shall be filed at the same time as an application for any permit or other approval not exempted by this chapter. The checklist shall be in the form of WAC 197-11-960 with such additions that may be required by the responsible official in accordance with WAC 197-11-906(4).
B. 
Environmental Checklist Not Needed: A checklist is not needed if the city and the applicant agree that an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency.
C. 
Environmental Checklist to Determine Lead Agency: The responsible official shall use the environmental checklist to determine the lead agency for making the threshold determination.
D. 
Completing Environmental Checklist: For private proposals, the applicant is required to complete the environmental checklist. The city may provide assistance as may be reasonably necessary. For city proposals the department initiating the proposal shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.
E. 
City to Complete Environmental Checklist: The city may decide to complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal if either of the following occurs:
1. 
The city has technical information on a question or questions that is unavailable to the private applicant; or
2. 
The applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous proposals or on proposals currently under consideration.
In the event the city completes the environmental checklist, the applicant shall pay the city all costs involved in completion, including but not limited to, administrative time and consultant’s fees.
F. 
The responsible official shall use the environmental checklist substantially in the form found in WAC 197-11-960 to assist in making threshold determinations for proposals, except for:
1. 
Public proposals on which the lead agency has decided to prepare its own EIS;
2. 
Proposals on which the lead agency and applicant agree an EIS will be prepared; and
3. 
Projects which are proposed as planned actions, which shall be governed by the requirements of WAC 197-11-315(2).
G. 
For projects submitted as planned actions under WAC 197-11-164, the city shall use its existing environmental checklist form or may modify the environmental checklist form as provided in WAC 197-11-315. The modified environmental checklist form may be prepared and adopted along with or as part of a planned action ordinance; or developed after the ordinance is adopted. In either case, a proposed modified environmental checklist form must be sent to the Department of Ecology to allow at least a thirty-day review prior to use.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
The responsible official, in reviewing the environmental impacts of a project and making the threshold determination, shall determine that the requirements for environmental analysis, protection and mitigation measures in the city’s comprehensive plan and development regulations adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW, and in other applicable local, state or federal laws or rules provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for some or all of the specific adverse environmental impacts of the project. In conducting this review the responsible official shall:
1. 
Determine whether applicable regulations require studies that adequately analyze all of the project application’s specific probable adverse environmental impacts;
2. 
Determine whether applicable regulations require measures that adequately address such environmental impacts;
3. 
Determine whether additional studies are required and/or whether the project permit application should be conditioned with additional mitigation measures;
4. 
Provide prompt and coordinated review by government agencies and the public on compliance with applicable environmental laws and plans, including mitigation for specific project impacts that have not been considered and addressed at the plan or development regulation level;
5. 
Review and document consistency with the comprehensive plan and development regulations; and
6. 
Consult the procedures set forth in WAC 197-11-158.
B. 
In its review of a Project Permit application, the city may determine, pursuant to the criteria of RCW 43.21C.240(l) and (2), the requirements for environmental analysis, protection and mitigation measures in the applicable development regulations, comprehensive plan and/or in other applicable local, state or federal laws provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts of the application.
C. 
If the city’s comprehensive plan and development regulations adequately address a project’s probable specific adverse environmental impacts, as determined under subsection (D)(1) of this section, or RCW 43.21C.240(1) and (2), the city shall not impose additional mitigation under SEPA during project review.
D. 
A comprehensive plan, development regulation or other applicable local, state or federal law provides adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts of an application when:
1. 
The impacts have been avoided or otherwise mitigated; and
2. 
The city has designated as acceptable certain levels of service, land use designations, development standards or other land use planning required or allowed by Chapter 36.70A RCW.
E. 
In its decision whether a specific adverse environmental impact has been addressed by an existing rule or law of another agency with jurisdiction with environmental expertise with regard to a specific environmental impact, the city shall consult orally or in writing with that agency and may expressly defer to that agency. In making this deferral, the city shall base or condition its project approval on compliance with these other existing rules or laws.
F. 
Nothing in this section limits the authority of the city in its review or mitigation of a project to adopt or otherwise rely on environmental analyses and requirements under other laws, as provided in Chapter 43.21C RCW.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
As provided in this section and WAC 197-11-350, the responsible official may issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) based on conditions attached to the proposal by the responsible official, or on changes to, or clarifications of, the proposal made by the applicant.
B. 
An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a DS is likely under WAC 197-11-350. The request must:
1. 
Follow submission of a permit application and environmental checklist for a nonexempt proposal for which the city is lead agency.
2. 
Precede the city’s actual threshold determination for the proposal.
C. 
The responsible official’s written response to the request for early notice shall:
1. 
State whether the city currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific areas of concern that are leading the city to consider a DS.
2. 
State that the applicant may change or clarify the proposal to mitigate the indicated impacts, and may revise the environmental checklist and/or permit application as necessary to reflect the changes or clarifications.
D. 
When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal, along with a revised environmental checklist, the city shall base its threshold determination on the changed or clarified proposal:
1. 
If the city indicated specific mitigation measures in its response to the request for early notice, and the applicant changed or clarified the proposal to include those specific mitigation measures, the city shall issue and circulate a DNS if the city determines that no additional information or mitigation measures are required.
2. 
If the city indicated areas of concern, but did not indicate specific mitigation measures that would allow it to issue a DNS, the city shall make the threshold determination, issuing a DNS or DS as appropriate.
3. 
The applicant’s proposed mitigation measures, clarifications, changes, or conditions must be in writing and must be specific.
4. 
Mitigation measures which justify issuance of a mitigated DNS may be incorporated in the DNS by reference to agency staff reports, studies, or other documents.
E. 
A mitigated DNS is issued under either WAC 197-11-340(2), requiring a fourteen day comment period and public notice, or WAC 197-11-355, which may require no additional comment period beyond the comment period on the notice of application. If the mitigated DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2), the city shall not act upon a proposal for which a mitigated DNS has been issued for fourteen days after the date of issuance.
F. 
Mitigation measures incorporated in the mitigated DNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the permit decision and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit, or enforced in any matter specifically prescribed by the city. Failure to comply with the designated mitigation measures shall be grounds for suspension and/or revocation of any permit issued.
G. 
If the city’s tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a mitigated DNS for the proposal, the city should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) relating to the withdrawal of a DNS.
H. 
The city’s response under subsection (C) of this section shall not be construed as a determination of significance. In addition, preliminary discussion of clarifications or changes to a proposal, as opposed to a written request for early notice, shall not bind the city to consider the clarifications or changes in its threshold determination.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
If the responsible official has a reasonable basis for determining that significant adverse environmental impacts are unlikely, the responsible official may elect to use the single integrated comment period to obtain comments on the notice of application and the likely threshold determination for the proposal as set forth in this section. If this process is used, a second comment period will typically not be required when the DNS is issued.
B. 
If the optional process set forth in this section is used, the responsible official shall:
1. 
State on the first page of the notice of application that it expects to issue a DNS for the proposal, and that:
a. 
The optional DNS process is being used;
b. 
This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;
c. 
The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared; and
d. 
A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request (in addition, the city may choose to maintain a general mailing list for threshold determination distribution).
2. 
List in the notice of application the conditions being considered to mitigate environmental impacts, if a mitigated DNS is expected.
3. 
Comply with the requirements for a notice of application and public notice in RCW 36.70B.110, as set forth in Chapter 16.06 PMC.
4. 
Send the notice of application and environmental checklist to:
a. 
Agencies with jurisdiction, the department of ecology, affected tribes, and each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal; and
b. 
Anyone requesting a copy of the environmental checklist for the specific proposal (in addition, the city may choose to maintain a general mailing list for checklist distribution).
C. 
If the responsible official indicates on the notice of application that a DNS is likely, an agency with jurisdiction may assume lead agency status during the comment period on the notice of application in accordance with PMC 16.14.060 and WAC 197-11-948.
D. 
The responsible official shall consider timely comments on the notice of application and either:
1. 
Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with no comment period using the procedures in subsection (E) of this section;
2. 
Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with a comment period using the procedures in subsection (E) of this section, if the responsible official determines a comment period is necessary;
3. 
Issue a DS; or
4. 
Require additional information or studies prior to making a threshold determination.
E. 
If a DNS or mitigated DNS is issued under subsections (D)(1) or (D)(2) of this section, the responsible official shall send a copy of the DNS or mitigated DNS to the Department of Ecology, agencies with jurisdiction, those who commented, and anyone requesting a copy. A copy of the environmental checklist need not be recirculated.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
“Planned action”
means one or more types of project action that:
1. 
Are designated planned actions by an ordinance or resolution adopted by the city pursuant to the requirements of WAC 197-11-168;
2. 
Have had significant environmental impacts adequately addressed in an environmental impact statement prepared in conjunction with:
a. 
A comprehensive plan or sub-area plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW.
b. 
A fully contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned development or a phased project;
3. 
Are subsequent to or implement projects for the proposals listed in subsection (A)(2) of this section;
4. 
Are located within an urban growth area, as defined in RCW 36.70A.030, or are located within a master planned resort;
5. 
Are not essential public facilities, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200; and
6. 
Are consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW.
B. 
The city shall limit planned actions to certain types of development or to specific geographical areas that are less extensive than the jurisdictional boundaries of the city.
C. 
The city may limit a planned action to a time period identified in the EIS or the designating ordinance or resolution adopted under WAC 197-11-168.
D. 
Planned actions do not require a threshold determination or the preparation of an environmental impact statement under SEPA, but are subject to environmental review and mitigation under SEPA.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented by this chapter:
WAC 197-11-400
Purpose of EIS.
WAC 197-11-402
General Requirements.
WAC 197-11-405
EIS Types.
WAC 197-11-406
EIS Timing.
WAC 197-11-408
Scoping.
WAC 197-11-410
Expanded Scoping.
WAC 197-11-420
EIS Preparation.
WAC 197-11-425
Style and Size.
WAC 197-11-430
Format.
WAC 197-11-435
Cover Letter or Memo.
WAC 197-11-440
EIS Contents.
WAC 197-11-442
Contents of EIS on Nonproject Proposals.
WAC 197-11-443
EIS Contents when Prior Nonproject EIS.
WAC 197-11-444
Elements of the Environment.
WAC 197-11-448
Relationship of EIS to Other Considerations.
WAC 197-11-450
Cost-Benefit Analysis.
WAC 197-11-455
Issuance of DEIS.
WAC 197-11-460
Issuance of FEIS.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
Preparation of draft and final ElSs (DEIS and FEIS) and draft and final SEISs (Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement) shall be under the direction of the responsible official. Before the city issues an EIS, the responsible official shall be satisfied that it complies with this chapter and Chapter 197-11 WAC.
B. 
The draft and final EIS or SEIS shall be prepared at the city’s option by the city staff, the applicant, or by a consultant approved by the city. If the responsible official requires an EIS for a proposal and determines that someone other than the city will prepare the EIS, the responsible official shall notify the applicant immediately after completion of the threshold determination. The responsible official shall also notify the applicant of the city’s procedure for EIS preparation, including approval of the draft and final EIS prior to distribution.
C. 
The city may require an applicant to provide information the city does not possess, including specific investigations; however, the applicant is not required to supply information that is not required under this chapter, or that is being requested from another agency; provided, however, this does not apply to information the city may request under another ordinance or statute.
D. 
Subject to delays caused by the applicant’s failure to provide information requested by the city and other delays beyond the city’s control. An EIS will be completed within one year of the date of the declaration of significance unless the city and the applicant agree in writing to a different estimated time period for completion of the EIS.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:
WAC 197-11-500
Purpose of this Part.
WAC 197-11-502
Inviting Comment.
WAC 197-11-504
Availability and Cost of Environmental Documents.
WAC 197-11-510
Public Notice.
WAC 197-11-535
Public Hearings and Meetings.
WAC 197-11-545
Effect of No Comment.
WAC 197-11-550
Specificity of Comments.
WAC 197-11-560
FEIS Response to Comments.
WAC 197-11-570
Consulted Agency Costs to Assist Lead Agency.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
Whenever possible, the city shall integrate the public notice required under this section with existing notice procedures for the city’s non-exempt permits or approvals required for the proposal.
Whenever the city issues a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2) or a DS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall give public notice as follows:
A. 
If public notice is required for a non-exempt permit, the notice shall state whether a DS or DNS has been issued and when comments are due.
B. 
If an environmental document is issued concurrently with the notice of application, public notice is required as set forth pursuant to PMC 16.06.240, and such notice will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-510(1)(b).
C. 
If no public notice is otherwise required for the permit or approval, the city shall provide public notice of the DNS or DS by:
1. 
Posting the property for site specific proposals, as set forth in PMC 16.06.310; and
2. 
Publishing notice in the city’s official newspaper, as set forth in PMC 16.06.310.
Whenever the city issues a DS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall state the scoping procedure for the proposal in the DS as required in WAC 197-11-408 and in the public notice.
If a DNS is issued using the optional DNS process set forth in WAC 197-11-355, the public notice requirements for a notice of application, as set forth in PMC 16.06.240 as supplemented by the requirements in PMC 16.14.160 shall be required.
Whenever the city issues a DEIS under WAC 197-11-455(5) or a SEIS under WAC 197-11-620, notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by:
A. 
Indicating the availability of the DEIS and any public notice required for a non-exempt permit; and
B. 
Publishing notice in the city’s official newspaper as set forth in PMC 16.06.310.
Public notice for projects that qualify as planned actions shall be tied to the underlying permit as specified in WAC 197-11-172(3).
The city shall require an applicant to compensate the city for the costs of compliance with public notice requirements as determined by the city for the applicant’s proposal.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
A. 
The responsible official shall prepare written comments for the city in response to consultation requests prior to a threshold determination, participation in scoping, and requests for review and comment upon draft environmental impact statements.
B. 
The responsible official shall be responsible for the city’s compliance with WAC 197-11-550 whenever the city is a consulted agency. The responsible official is also authorized to develop operating procedures that will ensure that responses to consultation requests are prepared in a timely fashion and include data from all appropriate departments of the city.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended by reference as supplemented in this chapter:
WAC 197-11-600
When to Use Existing Environmental Documents.
WAC 197-11-610
Use of NEPA Documents.
WAC 197-11-620
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements.
WAC 197-11-625
Addenda – Procedures.
WAC 197-11-630
Adoption – Procedures.
WAC 197-11-635
Incorporation by Reference – Procedures.
WAC 197-11-640
Combining Documents.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The DNS or final EIS for the proposal shall accompany the responsible officials recommendation on the proposal to all advisory and decisionmaking bodies, such as the planning commission and the city council.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city may attach conditions to a permit or project approval only when:
A. 
Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific adverse environmental impacts clearly identified in an environmental document prepared pursuant to this chapter;
B. 
Such conditions are in writing;
C. 
Such conditions are reasonable and capable of being accomplished;
D. 
The city has considered whether other local, state, or federal mitigation measures applied to the proposal are sufficient to mitigate the identified impacts; and
E. 
Such conditions are based on one or more SEPA Policies as set forth in PMC 16.14.280 and cited in the permit, approval or other decision document.
The city may deny a permit or approval for a proposal on the basis of SEPA only when:
A.
A finding is made that the proposal will result in significant adverse environmental impacts that are identified in a final EIS or final supplemental EIS;
B.
A finding is made that mitigation measures are insufficient to mitigate the identified impact; and
C.
The denial is based on one or more of the city’s SEPA policies as set forth in PMC 16.14.280 and identified in writing in the decision document.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing authorization of the city.
The city adopts by reference the policies in the following statutes, city codes, ordinances, resolutions, and plans as now exist and as may be hereafter amended, as a possible basis for the exercise of substantive authority in the conditioning or denying of proposals:
1. 
Chapter 43.21C RCW State Environmental Policy Act.
2. 
Title 5 PMC – Business, Licenses and Regulations.
3. 
Title 7 PMC – Animals.
4. 
Title 8 PMC – Health and Welfare.
5. 
Title 10 PMC – Vehicles and Traffic.
6. 
Title 12 PMC – Streets and Sidewalks.
7. 
Title 13 PMC – Public Utilities.
8. 
Chapter 16.24 PMC – Buildings and Construction.
9. 
Chapter 16.18 PMC – Flood Damage Prevention.
10. 
Chapter 16.10 PMC – Land Divisions.
11. 
Chapter 16.22 PMC – Zoning and Land Use.
12. 
Subchapter 16.04.400 PMC - Consistency with Development Regulations and SEPA.
13. 
Comprehensive Plan, City of Pomeroy, March 10, 1998, and as hereafter amended.
14. 
The current Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan, adopted by the Pomeroy city council.
15. 
The current solid waste management plan for Garfield County adopted by the Pomeroy city council.
16. 
Critical area ordinance adopted by the Pomeroy city council.
17. 
Other federal, state, county or city environmental development laws or regulations which the city may be mandated to adopt or which are subsequently adopted by the city council.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:
WAC 197-11-908
Critical Areas.
WAC 197-11-916
Application to Ongoing Actions.
WAC 197-11-920
Agencies with Environmental Expertise.
WAC 197-11-922
Lead Agency Rules.
WAC 197-11-924
Determining the Lead Agency.
WAC 197-11-926
Lead Agency for Government Proposals.
WAC 197-11-928
Lead Agency for Public and Private Proposals.
WAC 197-11-930
Lead Agency for Private Projects with One Agency with Jurisdiction.
WAC 197-11-932
Lead Agency for Private Projects Requiring Licenses from More than One Agency, When One of the Agencies is a County/City.
WAC 197-11-938
Lead Agencies for Specific Proposals.
WAC 197-11-940
Transfer of Lead Agency Status to a State Agency.
WAC 197-11-942
Agreements on Lead Agency Status.
WAC 197-11-944
Agreements on Division of Lead Agency Duties.
WAC 197-11-946
DOE Resolution of Lead Agency Disputes.
WAC 197-11-948
Assumption of Lead Agency Status.
(Ord. 763, 1999)
The city shall require the following fees for its activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter:
A. 
Threshold Determination. For every environmental checklist and revised environmental checklist the city will review as lead agency, the city shall collect a fee as set by resolution from the applicant prior to undertaking the threshold determination. When the city assists the applicant or completes the environmental checklist at the applicant's request or under PMC 16.14.130(E)(2), an additional fee equal to the estimated actual cost of providing the assistance shall be collected. If it is necessary to have the checklist reviewed by an outside land use professional, there shall be collected said additional review fee.
B. 
Environmental Impact Statement. When the city is the lead agency for a proposal requiring an EIS and the responsible official determines that the EIS shall be prepared by employees of the city, the city may charge and collect a reasonable fee from any applicant to cover costs incurred, including overhead, by the city in preparing the EIS. The responsible official shall advise the applicant of the projected costs for the EIS prior to actual preparation.
The responsible official may determine the city will contract directly with a consultant for preparation of an EIS, or a portion of the EIS, for a project applicant or entity other than the city, and may bill such costs and expenses directly to the applicant. Consultants shall be selected by the responsible official. Applicants may be required to post a bond or otherwise insure payment of costs for the preparation of the EIS.
The applicant shall pay the projected amount to the city. The city will refund the excess, if any, at the completion of the EIS. If the city’s costs exceed the projected costs, the applicant shall immediately pay the excess. If a proposal is modified so that an EIS is no longer required, the responsible official shall refund any fees collected under subsection (B)(1) or (2) of this section which remain after incurred costs, including overhead, are paid.
C. 
The city may collect a reasonable fee from an applicant to cover the costs of meeting the public notice requirements of this chapter relating to the applicant’s proposal.
D. 
The city may charge any person for copies of any document prepared under this chapter, and for mailing the document in a manner provided by Chapter 42.17 RCW.
E. 
If review of the application involves scientific, technical or specialized knowledge beyond the capabilities of city staff, the city may hire experts to review the application and shall charge the applicant for such expense.
F. 
A project applicant required to pay an impact fee for system improvements under RCW 82.02.050 through 82.02.090 shall not be required to pay a fee under this chapter for the same system improvements.
(Ord. 763, 1999; Ord. 886 § 9, 2016)
Pursuant to RCW 35A.12.140, one copy of the Washington Administrative Code sections adopted by reference herein have been and are now on file with the city clerk and are available for examination by the public.
(Ord. 763, 1999)